No. 18-5971
Donavan T. Fortin v. Brad Cain, Superintendent, Snake River Correctional Institution
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: actual-innocence due-process estelle-v-mcguire evidentiary-hearing federal-courts habeas-corpus habeas-corpus-principles judicial-review ninth-circuit state-court state-law state-law-interpretation williams-v-taylor
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2018-10-12
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Ninth Circuit's decision, which interpreted state law contrary to the state court's ruling, conflicts with Estelle v. McGuire
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Ninth Circuit’s decision, which interpreted state law contrary to the state court’s ruling, conflicts with Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62 (1991). 2. Whether the Ninth Circuit’s decision, which affirmed the denial of an evidentiary hearing even though the state court refused to adjudicate the claim, conflicts with fundamental habeas corpus principles, as recognized and applied in Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 420 (2000). i
Docket Entries
2018-10-15
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/12/2018.
2018-09-19
Waiver of right of respondent Mark Nooth to respond filed.
2018-09-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 15, 2018)
Attorneys
Brad Cain
Benjamin Noah Gutman — Oregon Department of Justice, Respondent
Donavan Fortin